UNACCEPTABLE! Brennan Stops Short Of Calling Waterboarding "Torture"

US News and World Report:
The White House's pick for CIA chief says the harsh interrogation technique known as waterboarding is reprehensible and should not be used on terror suspects — but he is refusing to call it a form of torture.
John Brennan says waterboarding should have never been legal and will never be used under his watch if he is confirmed as the Central Intelligence Agency director.

But he stopped short several times of calling it torture despite pointed questioning Thursday by Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan.

11. He is denying what he has done uner W. I believe that is the point.

14. He personally didn't conduct or order torture under W...

...in fact, his bio at the CIA from 1999-2005 clearly indicates he was working on the analyst side of the CIA, not the operations side which would have conducted or overseen the waterboarding:

*1999: Appointed chief of staff to George Tenet, then-Director of the CIA.

*2001: Brennan became deputy executive director of the CIA in March 2001.

*2003-2004: Director of the newly created Terrorist Threat Integration Center, an office that sifted through and compiled information for President Bush's daily top secret intelligence briefings and employed the services of analysts from a dozen U.S. agencies and entities.

*2004-2005: His last post within the Intelligence Community was as director of the National Counterterrorism Center which incorporated information on terrorist activities across U.S. agencies.

20. Too bad they can't call Torquemada to testify about waterboarding

He'd tell the committee that it was torture, and that he directed his inquisitors to use the technique because it worked at getting actionable intelligence from those suspected of witchcraft and heresy.

29. Enough intelligence to burn them all at the stake. It sure worked for the Inquisitors.

It should work for the CIA. Call it the Brennan Doctrine.

All who worked for the CIA in supervisory posts during the period in which torture or enhanced interrogation was administered should not be confirmed for the leadership post in the CIA. We must assume they had the ability to speak out or act against the policy, and they did not have the courage or common sense to do it.

25. If he had they would have claimed he was required to go after those who did it.

I hate this game.

Here's the way it works, Republicans break the law, claim they didn't and then DARE Democrats to claim they did so they can accuse the Democrats of being the bad guys by persecuting poor innocent Republicans who didn't do anything wrong.

I say, drag them out kicking and screaming, strip them naked, cover them in hot tar followed by feathers and ride them out of town on a rail bouncing their nut sack against the pole the whole way.

31. Brennan actually did a splendid job with his hearing overall, one of the best I've watched in ages

I'm serious, the man came across as reasonable and competent. He did not try to be evasive, he was not trying to impose his own will nor was he willing to say anything to please, he disagreed with several Senators several times. This will be the guy who is confirmed, and he will deserve it I suppose. One thing for sure, after today's hearing I'd have to say that the President could have done a whole lot worse.